Conflictology of the Ukrainian crisis

The Ukrainian crisis is of a complex nature, many conflicting conceptual fields have intertwined within it, the most significant of which are not visible either in the summaries of military operations, or in the comments of politicians explaining their decisions. The most obvious is the conflict between the current authorities in Kiev and the people’s militia of the Donbass, which the authorities are trying to solve by physical extermination of the militiamen together with the population whose interests they express. In this conflict, two conceptual fields are simultaneously involved, each of which, in isolation, does not have enough tension to cause a fratricidal war.

The first confrontational conceptual field concerns the internal political structure of Ukraine. The population of the Donbass, as well as of other regions of the South and East of Ukraine, initially demanded its federal structure and public recognition of the official status of the Russian language. These demands were openly put forward during all two decades of Ukrainian independence and were reflected in the programs of the Party of Regions and other electoral associations that expressed the interests of the South-East of Ukraine. However, no one has ever tried to achieve their satisfaction by force. And the Ukrainian political elite, consistently rejecting these demands, still did not regard them as an offense against the state. Everyone agreed that these issues should have been resolved exclusively in a legal democratic vein. The frenzied desire of the leaders of the current Kiev regime to physically destroy the supporters of federalization, as well as the desperate resistance of militiamen, go far beyond the generally accepted ways of resolving such conflicts. The position of Poroshenko and his power-wielding agencies to render the requirements of federalization tantamount to separatism and terrorism looks against the backdrop of many years of peaceful discussion on this topic as an apparent provocation of the conflict going beyond the legal field.

The second confrontational conceptual field is the so-called European choice of Ukraine. It was to this end that, according to Maidan activists, they beat and burned Kiev policemen. It was for this choice that the European officials and politicians agitated the Maidan crowd and supported the opposition. At the same time, as was shown by all sociological surveys[129], the overwhelming majority of residents of the South and East of Ukraine preferred the Eurasian integration over the European one. Despite the fact that the European emissaries, in spite of the European values of democracy and law that they proclaimed, completely ignored half of the Ukrainian population, just as they turned a blind eye to the inconsistency of the Association Agreement with the EU they imposed with the Constitution of Ukraine, it is unlikely that they planned to start a war to exterminate all citizens who did not want association with the EU. Moreover, the Ukrainian professional Eurointegrators themselves did not intend to move beyond the limits of the Verkhovna Rada in resolving this issue. They carefully avoided public discussion on this topic, preferring the ways of ramming the Association Agreement through behind the scenes. It should be noted that opponents of the association with the EU have argued that it does not meet the interests of Ukraine exclusively in the professional press, without appealing to the people with calls for the violent resolution of this issue. Obviously, even in the event of insurmountable differences, it was possible to find a peaceful way to resolve the conflict by legalizing various trade regimes for two parts of Ukraine following to the precedent of Greenland which, although being a part of Denmark, is not included with it in the EU.

None of the issues declared by the leaders of the opposing sides, for the solution of which they resort to violence, is not and cannot be solved in this way. Therefore, the war has been unleashed not to this effect. Ideologically, it is fermented on Nazism, as the propaganda of the Kiev junta indoctrinates the society with misanthropic ideas about the opponents. In relation to them, various zoological and other offensive definitions (pejoratives) are used, such as " rag-tag, " " Colorados, " etc., they are denied the right to express their position under the fear of beating and arrest, they are allowed to be burned alive and ordered to be killed by the Ukrainian military. The leaders of the Kiev regime publicly call for the massacre of all those who disagree with them. Poroshenko, installed by the U.S. on the Kiev throne, when giving awards to the murderers of Slavyansk residents directly called their victims " nonhuman beings" [130], and the government’s head Yatsenyuk publicly refers to the Russians living in Eastern Ukraine as subhumans[131]. Their main political competitor, Tymoshenko, even before the outbreak of a military conflict spoke of her desire to drop an atomic bomb on the Donbass[132], whereas Lyashko, who got the third position in the presidential election, was personally involved in the torture and murder of the coup opponents. A. Avakov, the head of the Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs, instead of protecting citizens from unlawful actions publicly speaks for the destruction of Ukrainian buildings together with people inside. Thus, the junta ruling in Kiev today affirms the necessity of destroying all citizens of Ukraine, depriving them of their human rights, including the right to life.

This conceptual field, a Nazi one in its essence, generates the main tension of the conflict and explains the use of violence to resolve it. Nazism always justifies violence against people of other nationalities and views, who for this reason are declared inferior, and against whom any crimes are allowed. The Kiev regime follows precisely this path of Nazism, fomenting hatred toward all those who consider themselves to be part of not the " Ukrainian heritage, " but of the traditional Russian world. The persecution of the Ukrainian Nazis is primarily directed against the Russians, in which they are traditionally helped by their Western patrons. This is all the more telling that many Ukrainian Nazis have Russian surnames and are ethnic Russians. That is, Ukrainian Nazism is an " ideological" Nazism, where the important thing is not one’s origin, racial or ethnic identity, but adoption of the concept of " Ukrainianness" and identification of oneself with its " collective unconscious."

The leaders of the Kiev junta and the overwhelming majority of the Ukrainian media, in full accordance with the characteristic features of Nazism, emphasize the superiority of the adherents of " Ukrainianness" over the Russians, to whom is imputed the " slave essence" and in respect of whom it is claimed in earnest that they should be ruthlessly exploit for the benefit of " true Ukrainians." By so doing, the Russians and other nationalities living in Ukraine are presented with a challenge: they should either acknowledge their human inferiority, or go over to the camp of " Ukrainianness" supporters, or defend their rights against the Ukrainian Nazis with lethal force.

Our own and international historical experience convincingly shows that Nazism can only be stopped by force. The Nazis do not understand any other language. And this is not surprising, as their ethics and, accordingly, their right are based on the denial of any fundamental equality between people. The Nazis deny " subhumans" such equality at all levels of society, and it is possible to prove the opposite to them only through direct force confrontation.

Ukrainian Nazism is no exception. Moreover, having no roots in the traditional culture of the population of Ukraine, being in fact, superficial and induced from the outside, it is forced to fulfill itself in the most cruel forms, binding the part of Ukrainian society that is subordinate to it with a kind of " bloody frank-pledge." The senseless and deliberate cruelty with which the Ukrainian Nazis shell the Donbass settlements is caused precisely by this circumstance. By arranging mass crimes against those who consider themselves Russians, as well as by launching an extensive Russophobic propaganda, the Kiev Fü hrers are trying to create a sufficiently strong tension in order to provoke in the Ukrainian public consciousness the intensity of confrontation they need to consolidate the society on the principle " it is either us or them."

It is interesting that none of the leaders of the Ukrainian state, who act as heralds of Ukrainian Nazism, is an ethnic Ukrainian. All of them have a very remote relation to Ukraine as such, as well as to its cultural, historical and spiritual roots. Perhaps this is the reason for their lack of any moral restrictions in the employment of violence against the population of the country. Having no doubts, they throw thousands of forcibly mobilized lads to the slaughter, and compel them to massacre their compatriots. The more blood, the better for them.

The article by A. Rogers[133] Nazi Blunders convincingly shows the cult of violence as the main component of Ukrainian Nazism. By the level of senseless cruelty and misanthropy, they outperformed their Hitlerite idols, posing with pleasure against the scorched corpses of Odessa residents, or openly rejoicing at the slaughter of children and women in Slavyansk. As the same author shows, the Ukrainian society has already developed all 14 basic features of fascism that were singled out by the outstanding thinker Umberto Eco[134] including the cult of strength, contempt for the weak, condemnation of pacifism as a form of betrayal. This particular fact explains the ineffectiveness of the negotiations held so far to cease violence and resolve the Ukrainian crisis.

The logic goes that all parties should be interested in stopping hostilities in the Donbass. They are deleterious to Ukraine, Russia, the Donbass itself, and threaten Europe. However, the leaders of the Kiev junta do not want to listen to the opposite side, speaking exclusively in the language of threats and ultimatums. Any attempts to question their actions lead to new hysterical attacks of hatred and aggression. Any politician, journalist or just a passer-by who dares to question the rightness of the Ukrainian Nazis immediately gets humiliated and beaten, and the Ukrainian special services institute criminal proceedings against such person. This fully complies with one of the signs of fascism after U. Eco, " disagreement is treason." The conflict field generated by Ukrainian Nazism is the main motive power of both the violence in Ukraine as a whole, and of the punitive operation in the Donbass. The question arises, what are the sources and driving forces of Ukrainian Nazism? After all, as it would seem, the four Ukrainian fronts of the Soviet Army liberated Ukraine forever from all kinds of Nazis. From whence, then, did emerge so many successors of their criminal war against the people of Ukraine in the country that directly experienced the horrors of the fascist occupation and made a huge contribution to the victory over the Nazis?

The answer to this question lies in the plane of another conflict field, which has been active for many centuries. This is the field of aggression of the West against Russia, the eternal " Drang nach Osten" continuing to this day. In this field, Ukraine has always occupied an important place. We have already quoted the statements of Western European and American politicians about the key importance of tearing Ukraine off in order to crush Russia. Modern understanding of this issue by American diplomacy is characterized by the maxim of Z. Brzezinski, who wrote that " without Ukraine, Russia ceases to be a Eurasian empire." [135]

Ukrainian Nazism is the product of the misanthropic ideology cultivated in the West for several centuries. Three centuries ago, having imagined themselves the highest race of mankind, the British made racism the ideological basis of their world empire. Until now, Americans are seriously convinced of their superiority over all other peoples of the world, which allegedly gives them a " natural right" to hold court over other countries and their leaders based on the U.S. criteria of what is due. This cult of the U.S. exceptionality serves as the basis for the U.S. authorities to punish any other nations, up to their physical extermination, in case of non-compliance with U.S. requirements. These requirements themselves are determined, as a rule, by the economic interests of U.S. capital, which are actively screened with demagoguery about human rights and democratic values. These interests, in particular, stipulate a complete opening of borders for U.S. goods and capital, adoption of U.S. education and culture standards, use of the dollar as a reserve currency and a means of international settlements. The U.S. is imposing itself on other countries of the world as the main arbiter of all conflicts, both external and internal. It considers itself entitled to subject to sanctions, deprive of liberty and even of the life itself any citizens of any countries who are not to the U.S. liking, whereas the domestic legislation of the U.S. is extended to the whole world, imposing at the same time on other states the primacy of international obligations. Obama’s recent statements about exceptionality of the United States testify to the persistence of the racist ideology that is designed to justify any crimes of the U.S. military and political machine against humanity. The growth of military spending and ramping up tension in the world are vital for the U.S. to maintain its " exceptionality": " America must always lead on the world stage. If we don’t, no one else will." [136] These claims to global leadership are objectively connected today with the need to " get rid" of the exorbitant burden of the U.S. public debt and to transfer the U.S. economy on a new long wave of growth.

In accordance with this misanthropic ideology, the U.S. political machine implements a differentiated approach to countries depending on the willingness of their leadership to follow the U.S. interests. All countries are divided into " good" ones, that completely follow in the wake of American policy (the British Commonwealth, Western Europe, Japan, Korea, Israel, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, Qatar), " underdeveloped" ones, that need to be taught American values through political coercion (Eastern Europe, Latin America), and " bad" ones, which do not obey the U.S. dictates. With respect to the latter, any technology of destruction from outside and from within is allowed (Russia, China, India, North Africa, the Middle East, etc.) to subjugate them by either revolution and establishment of a regime controlled by the U.S., or by conquest and establishment of a colonial regime, or disintegration and subjugation in parts. There is no doubt that with respect to Russia and the post-Soviet space the U.S. political engineers have applied, do apply and will apply all means of destruction available to them.

In full accordance with the British geopolitical principle of " divide and rule, " American political psychologists impart to Ukrainian Nazis they nurture a cult of hatred and superiority over the Russians that they have " appointed" to be guilty of all the troubles and problems of Ukraine. At the same time, Nazis are being convinced of their inferiority relative to Americans and Western Europeans, who ought to be learned from and submissively obeyed as masters. As a result of such psycho-ideological treatment, the world view of Ukrainian Nazism fancifully combines contempt and hatred towards Russians with a blind admiration for Americans and Western Europeans. In just the same way Banderites, the Ukrainian Nazis of the last century, acknowledged their subordinate, servile condition relative to the " Aryans" of the Third Reich. At the same time, they considered themselves superior to Russians, Poles, Jews, Tatars and other nationalities living in Ukraine. This purely animal submission to a strong foreigner and humiliation of defenseless compatriots is the essence of Ukrainian Nazism, resulting from a sense of inferiority of young and often lumpenized people, uneducated and incapable of fulfilling themselves in creative activities. Modern Ukrainian Nazis earnestly believe in the omnipotence of their American patrons, blindly obeying their instructions and bowing down before Washington, naï vely believing in its ability and desire to force Russia to surrender to Ukraine and to fulfill all the Ukrainian Nazi claims to superiority and violence.

Ukrainian Nazism, cultivated by Western instructors, has always been directed against the Russians, against Moscow. In this, the current Ukrainian Nazis do not differ from their predecessors, the henchmen of Hitler. The only factor that has changed is their master. However, this master, unlike the Nazis of the Third Reich, prefers to have someone else do the whole dirty work. Ukrainian Nazis have to shoulder not only the punitive actions with massacres of their fellow citizens, but also the risks connected with military activities and political responsibility.

Both in the years of the German fascist occupation and today, Ukrainian Nazism is a tool of external forces, deeply alien to the national interests of Ukraine. Hardly anyone in their right mind will argue that the Hitler regime could bring any benefits to the Ukrainian people. For the German fascists, the latter was nothing more than beasts of draught forced to work for free to the benefit of the " Great Germany." Quite similarly, for the current Eurocracy, Ukraine is nothing more than a reservoir of cheap labor, a market for the sale of European goods, as well as a place to dump waste and place environmentally dirty industries. It is hard to imagine that the leaders of the state who actually think in terms of national interests would have signed the Association Agreement with the EU, which unilaterally delegates to the external actor the sovereign functions of the state in regulating foreign economic activities, pursuing foreign and defense policy, significantly worsening the competitiveness of the national economy and undermining the payment balance of the country. Nevertheless, the Agreement on the Association with the EU, signed by the Kiev junta, contains all these and many other discriminatory obligations.

Modern Ukrainian Nazism was being created and imposed by the U.S. and its European allies as one of the tools of Western aggression against Russia. Without a systemic and consistent policy of the U.S. and its NATO allies, nothing like this could have arisen in Ukraine, since there were no objective prerequisites for this. It was created artificially through the activities of numerous nationalist anti-Russian organizations funded by the U.S. and EU against the backdrop of a gradual deterioration of the social and economic situation in the country, along with the consistent provocation of conflicts between Kiev and Moscow. At the same time, the discrepancy between the ideology of Ukrainian Nazism and the realities of history does not in any way confuse its Fü hrers who, for a small fee of sponsors from NATO countries, mold an " enemy image" from Russia. Since, taking into account the general history, faith, language and culture (Kiev as the " mother of Russian cities, " the Kiev Pechersk Lavra as the main sacred place of the Russian Orthodox world, and the Kiev Mohyla Academy as the place of the formation of the Russian language), it looks unconvincing, blatant lies were used that passed off tragic episodes of the common history (revolution and civil war, " Holodomor" and so on) as a result of Russia’s arbitrary and violent acts during the " Moskal occupation."

The ideamongers of Ukrainian Nazism are not in the least embarrassed by the fact that the Russians proper were negligible among the leaders of the Bolshevik power, while those who came from the territory of modern Ukraine, especially from Galicia and other regions of the " pale of settlement" represented the overwhelming majority, and that the Bolshevik power itself relied on Ukrainian nationalists, transferring under their control the vast and densely populated lands of Novorossiya.

Throughout all the years of independence, Russophobia was regarded by Kiev authorities as the basis for the formation of a new national identity. In any case, they failed to find another basis for Ukrainian statehood, be it economic, political, or ideological one.

However, the transition from the premise " Ukraine is not Russia" [137] to the premise " Russia is the enemy of Ukraine" required a very risky reincarnation of Hitlerite Ukrainian Nazism under the current conditions. It was risky and unsafe, above all, for Europe, in the memory of peoples of which the horrors of the Second World War are still associated with dangers of a Nazi revanche. European leaders needed clear and compelling arguments to turn a blind eye to the outrages of the Ukrainian Nazis and connive at their crimes.

Such arguments were abundantly provided to them by the global media, controlled by the U.S. oligarchy. Representing the Ukrainian Nazis as defenders of European values and portraying their crimes against the population of Novorossiya as " the defense of democracy and the European choice of a united Ukraine, " they are zombifying the public opinion of the EU states. Consequently, European support for Ukrainian Nazis is induced not by their interests, but by the desire of the U.S. leadership to maintain their global leadership by weakening Europe and Russia and plunging them into the chaos.

Above, we showed the objective causes of the U.S. aggression caused by exhaustion of opportunities for further socio-economic leadership of the U.S. due to completion of the life cycle of the dominant technological and world economic paradigms. The world production center has already moved to China and other countries of the Asia-Pacific Region (APR). The financial and information hegemony of the U.S. is threatened by the ever growing likelihood of collapse of the pyramid of debt obligations denominated in dollars. It is already more than 25 times greater than the size of the world economy. The status of the dollar as the " world currency" is undermined by the processes of regional economic integration. Finally, as was shown above, the inability to maintain a balance of the national financial and economic system without a powerful and increasing feed from the outside objectively pushes the U.S. towards the escalation of military and political tension and unleashing of a new global war. This is the main conflict field of our time, the over-tension of which induces spikes in all other conflict fields. Now we return to its analysis.

 

 

Section 3

⇐ Предыдущая3456789101112Следующая ⇒

Поделиться: